BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAITHAL.
Complaint Case No.106 of 2020.
Date of institution: 02.03.2020.
Date of decision:25.02.2022.
Ram Phal Sharma son of Sh. Jai Narain Sharma R/o Village Pilni, Tehsil Pundri, District Kaithal.
…Complainant.
Versus
- S.D.O. Op. Sub Division UHBVN, Pundri, Distt. Kaithal.
- Executive Engineer, Op. Division UHBVN Pundri.
….Respondents.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act
CORAM: DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT.
SMT. SUMAN RANA, MEMBER.
SH. RAJBIR SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. Balbir Bansal, Advocate for the respondents.
ORDER
DR. NEELIMA SHANGLA, PRESIDENT
Ramphal-Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the respondents.
In nutshell, the facts of present case are that the complainant is user of electricity connection No.X52 KN385142-K and has been paying the bills regularly. The case of complainant is that he had received a bill of Rs.25,550/- on 26.12.2018 and at that time, there was bill waiving scheme and complainant had paid the said bill amount. Thereafter, the complainant received a bill of Rs.609/- and he has paid the said bill amount and thereafter, the complainant has received bill of Rs.715/- on 25.04.2019 and due to wheat season, the complainant could not pay the said amount within time. Thereafter, the respondents have issued an bill of Rs.81,995/- on 27.06.2019 to the complainant. The said bill amount is excessive, wrong and illegal and the complainant is not liable to deposit the said bill amount. The complainant moved an application to the respondents to correct the said bill amount but the respondents did not redress the grievances of complainant. So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of respondents and prayed for acceptance of complaint.
2. Upon notice, the respondents appeared before this Commission and contested the complaint by filing their written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to locus-standi; maintainability; cause of action; that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this commission. As the previous old meter of complainant was found dead installed in the premises of the house for the before June, 2019 and as per the dead report, the previous dead meter was that there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondents. On merits, the objections raised in the preliminary objections are reiterated and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.
3. We have heard both the parties and perused the record carefully.
4. Complainant appearing in person has stated that on 06.02.2018 there was “bill settlement scheme” in which bill of Rs.20,958/- was exempted by the respondents. He has further stated that in the next month, he paid Rs.609/- as electricity bill but the next bill of Rs.715/- for the month of April, 2019 was not paid by him.
It has been argued by Sh. Balbir Bansal, Adv. for the respondents that in the month of June, 2019 all the electricity meter were changed in the premises of consumers and those electricity meters were installed outside the house of consumers. Hence, the electricity meter of Ramphal was also got changed and was got installed outside his residence. In that month, electricity bill of Rs.81,000/- was received by Ramphal. Troubled by the exorbitant electricity bill, he moved a complaint in C.M.Window on 03.04.2020. Verification was done at the end of Electricity Department. The concerned staff noticed that the electricity bill was raised as per the rate of Rs.7/- per unit which was got reduced from Rs.7/- per unit to Rs.2/- per unit. Hence, out of the total bill of Rs.1,04,303/-, Rs.72,911/- were got adjusted and reduced. The surcharge amount was also adjusted in this amount. After that, Ramphal did not pay a single penny towards the electricity bill w.e.f. April, 2019 till today. The concerned S.D.O. is present in the court. He has checked all his ledger and account-books and as per the written statement, balance amount of Rs.39,857/- is pending upto 22.10.2020 which complainant is liable to pay for regular consumption till today.
5. Thus, as a sequel of our aforesaid discussion, Ramphal is directed to pay the aforesaid amount in 12 equal installments. The Electricity Department shall not take the surcharge from him for the aforesaid amount w.e.f. 2019 till onward. Nothing more remains to be adjudicated. Hence, complaint is partly accepted. A copy of said order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record-room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
Dt.:25.02.2022.
(Dr. Neelima Shangla)
President.
(Rajbir Singh), (Suman Rana),
Member. Member.
Typed by: Sanjay Kumar, S.G.
